CHANDRA LALIT SANGHVI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7535/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 February 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the difference between the sale consideration and stamp duty valuation was within the 10% tolerance limit. Following a co-ordinate bench decision, the Tribunal ruled that amendments enhancing the tolerance limit are curative and retrospective.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased a residential property with co-owners. The Assessing Officer (AO) invoked Section 56(2)(vii)(b) for the difference between the purchase consideration and stamp duty valuation. The CIT(A) allowed partial relief, deleting some addition but upholding a portion.

What were the issues?

Whether the benefit of the 10% tolerance limit for the difference between sale consideration and stamp duty valuation, introduced by later amendments, can be applied retrospectively to the assessment year 2017-18.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(vii)(b),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 15-09-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟), vide order dt. 25-05-2023, wherein the AO brought to tax a sum of Rs. 81,99,612/- being the difference between the purchase consideration

2 and the stamp duty valuation, invoking the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 56(2)(vii)(b)

All 626 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(vii)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →